JCC The Airline Disaster Thread

Granted it was harsh. But I'm not faulting his parents completely... Yes they are hurting. But let me play devils advocate...what if they sis know he had serious depression issues? And they didn't maybe consider that could potentially lead to suicidal thoughts? He's a pilot...there's been past events where pilots brought down a plane. What if they didn't say or do anything? I am just stating that they can be partly responsible or at least maybe...just maybe could have done something to prevent this. Is it a stretch...yes...but it's a possibility. That's why I said multiple parties can be held indirectly responsible.

But instead I've been ridiculed for having such an opinion.

 

I think it's a stretch. You want them to screw up his career on a hunch?

 

1. Why do you presume that his parents would know anything about it?

2. On what basis do you think they'd have leverage to do anything? Barring a comment from him about planning to crash a plane, how would that be linked to this? Just saying someone has depression, ergo is a danger is a ridiculous leap to take. You'd need more to go on.

3. While we're totally speculating, I'd like to speculate that maybe you knew this guy, and that you're partially responsible for not doing anything when maybe you could've. I mean, I have nothing to base that on, but that seems to be the style these days.

 

Very mature. Thanks for proving my point. You guys all resort to name calling and dissing others who have diff opinions. Grow up.

 

Whilst bleedingly obvious it is possibly worth a reminder that air travel is inherently risky as are all forms of transportation. There are just no limits on what can go wrong. Now the aviation industry has made air travel very very safe, but there is just no possibility whatsoever that it can make air travel absolutely safe. Therefore every time you board an aircraft you are taking a calculated risk. The risk can be a suicidal pilot or some frayed wiring or a hairline crack in a bolt or the million other problems which can cause am aircraft to crash.

The best solution to avoid death by aircraft misadventure is simply to avoid flying. You will then statistically most likely be killed in a car crash or be shot by a policeman. The next best solution is to fly with airlines with a good safety record but that just means the risk is more calculated.

 

Of course I don't know. I just said its a possibility. The co-pilot lived with his parents. If a doctor is saying he had serious depression, he parents might see some signs. He apparently was treated for depression before, now he's going through it again. I'm just saying these are flags and warning signs that maybe this individual shouldn't have been allowed to fly. The parents "could" "potentially" have said something...the doctor could have as well. So if its a confidentiality issue...laws should change (aviation laws) so doctors can inform the airlines to remove the individual from work.

 

In fairness, I wasn't ridiculing you (or at least that was not my intent). Rather, I was taking the form of argument you were making and using it on you in an attempt to show you how off-the-mark it was. The rest of the board disagrees with your opinions, but that's obviously not your parents' fault or the fault of the JCC staff. Just the same, it's (so far as we know at the moment) not the fault of the co-pilots' parents or anyone else except the co-pilot himself for the actions that he put into effect on that flight.

That's all I was saying. I even added the emoticon so you'd know not to take it to heart.

First off, the term "devil's advocate"--be careful how you use that term because in my observation most people who use it are trying to claim they don't espouse the argument they're advocating but it's obvious they do. (I.e., most people see right through that term.)

Anyway, that's a lot of conjecture. And I feel like a lot of the "warning signs" would be a hindsight 20/20 sort of thing. In the minds of most people who knew the guy, he was just a regular person who occasionally struggled with depression but was receiving treatment for it and living his lifelong dream of flying. LOTS of people struggle with depression, myself included. Not all of us have been suicidal, and very few of us at all have been homicidal. (I have been neither, in case anyone needs to know for sure!) Based on what little we know, when people who knew him personally claim there's no way they could've ever seen this coming, I believe them.

The only one I'm aware who did foresee problems was the doctor who recommended that he was unfit for work--but he did what he was supposed to do in that suggestion that he not work, so that doctor can't be held liable. I would be prepared to hold whoever responsible who did ignore that recommendation, though.

 

Do we know exactly why the doctor deemed him "unfit for work"? It could be a lot of things. For example, the doctor could have been worried that being distracted by his mental illness could have caused the pilot to be negligent and accidentally cause a crash. Or anything, really.

 

And my point 3 is also a possibility. I question the validity of wild speculation rather than waiting to see what information is found and working with facts. That mindset of 'actual evidence' and no rampant speculation may keep me from being a host on CNN, but I still think it's prudent.

 

Yes your point 3 is a possibility... If I knew or lived with the copilot. Good point.

 

let's turn this into a desaster thread:

 

BBC Website reporting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32098578

 

Your total carbon footprint: 229,608 lbs CO2e

 

I would imagine that's what they will do. If a pilot has to go, just call a crew member up, and head out once they're in. Just make sure they're up there as needed. I would think that's how the FAA already does it.

 

And goodbye!

 

dp4m the point of the second person isn't that they could fly the plane themselves but that they could prevent the person from engaging the lockout. Not perfect by any means, the co-pilot could overpower them, but more than anything that their presence would act as a deterrent.

 

Thank you for your compassionate take on mental illness; whilst the above concludes beyond any reasonable doubt you know no people with depression (as they're not all suicidal), you have at least ensured that insipid stigmas dreamed up by idiotic and tiny minds with keyboards and an internet connection continue to define society's view of them. And since that view, as unfathomably stupid as it is, is that depression = suicidal = risk, people treat them like lepers.

You're a great person, who forms well thought out and well researched conclusions about topics which, despite the apparent impediment of little to no exposure, you can nevertheless speak about with confidence and accuracy. I look forward to a response where you tell me that you only socialise with depressed people, to highlight how your posts aren't a waste of bandwidth in which a man of limited ability rails against a condition he doesn't understand... which I guess using patented DarthBane93 Logic™ means your circle of friends is forever shrinking as they off themselves.

Go you, sir.

 

Uh... ES?
I don't think he's here.

 

He'll come back.

 

My company offsets me and is carbon-neutral.

 

That's the forum equivalent of 'kicking a man when he is down'.

 

The app I used for conversion informed me that two trees need to be planted to make you carbon-neutral. Seems doable.

To keep this on topic: you know what would be a thing. If a plane crashed in a planted carbon restoration forest.
"Planes should not fly over forests!!"

 

Does your company use tax avoidance methods to offset your carbon print, dp4m?








That's for Man of Steel!